As I said, this was an idea for a possible New Capenna mechanic. The idea is that different gangs are fighting over territory within New Capenna (for example), though the flavor is intentionally vague enough that it could be used in an expansionist Ixalan-Esque setting or in the backdrop of a war in another set.
Regarding what this is, I suppose that counters work best for what Territory is supposed to be. With that, this is supposed to be a resource that you can steal from others and the language for doing so with counters doesn’t really exist under someone’s control to steal.
I guess that the proper language (or something closer to it) would be.
Territory
Whenever a creature deals combat damage to you, you lose one territory counter. If you do, that creature’s controller gains a territory counter.
Is that a clear way to put things in rules terms. Does this cause any rules headaches in settings like 2HG where creatures controlled by two players may hit you simultaneously or does the rules allow that to work out?
So, this mechanic is a little bit out there so I wanted to ask for help to make sure that everything is cromulent. With WotC's increased willingness to make "supplemental cards" like the day/night card or dungeons relevant for games, I started trying to design a second a similar mechanic to see what I could come up with that might fit in the general aesthetic of New Capenna.
What I came up with was rough emulation of the Skirmish ability originally imagined for War of the Sparks, playing out as the lovechild of Monarch and Energy by way of Strixhaven Stadium.
Territory (Whenever a creature deals combat damage to you, its controller may claim one of your territories)
That's the mechanic. You can build up multiple territories and potentially expend them to create effects as with energy from Kaladesh but the fact that they can be stolen through combat damage means that almost any player has access to counterplay (rather than being uninteractive).
Example Cards:
Committed Recruit
Creature- Human Rogue (C)
committed Recruit has vigilance as long as you have one or more territories.
2/2
Protection Racket
Creature- Human Warrior (U) , Sacrifice another creature: Target creature you control gains protection from the color of your choice until end of turn. You gain one Territory.
2/3
From the Inside
Sorcery (R)
From the Inside costs less for each Territory you have.
Destroy all creatures. You lose all territories.
Daring Saboteur
Creature- Vedalken Rogue (C)
Daring Saboteur cannot be blocked while attacking a player with two or more territories.
1/1
Backalley Dealings
Sorcery (U)
Scry 2, then draw two cards.
You gain two Territories.
Secret Dealer
Creature- Human Rogue (R)
When enters the battlefield, you gain a Territory.
Whenever you take a territory from an opponent, you may pay . If you do, draw a card.
2/3
Rat Out
Sorcery (C)
You lose two Territories. For each territory lost in this way, each opponent discards a card.
Create two 1/1 Black Rat creature tokens.
Brutal Retaliation
Enchantment (U)
Whenever you lose one or more territories, create a 1/1 black orc rogue creature token. : Target rogue gains deathtouch until end of turn.
Backalley Lieutenant
Creature- Orc Rogue (R)
When Backalley Lieutenant enters the battlefield, you gain a Territory.
Whenever you take a territory from an opponent, put a +1/+1 counter on target rogue you control.
1/1
Fervent Enforcer
Creature- Goblin Warrior (C)
When Fervent Enforcer enters the battlefield, you gain one Territory.
As long as you have three or more territories, Fervent Enforcer gets +1/+0 and has haste.
2/2
Staged Accident
Sorcery (U)
Destroy target land. Staged Accident deals 1 damage to its controller for each Territory you possess.
You gain one Territory.
Cash Out
Sorcery (R)
You lose all Territories. For each territory lost in this way, create a treasure token.
Audacious Pet
Creature- Beast (C)
Defender
Audacious Pet can attack as though it didn’t have defender if you have four or more Territories.
6/6
Case the Joint
Sorcery (U)
Look at the top four cards of your library. You may reveal a colorless card from among them and put it into your hand. Put the rest on the bottom of your library in a random order.
You gain one Territory.
Felltimber’s Favored
Creature- Elf Warrior (R)
When Felltimber’s Favored enters the battlefield, you gain one Territory.
Felltimber’s Favored gets +1/+1 for each Territory you possess.
1/1
I think that the general idea of the Territories is fairly straightforward but I feel that it doesn't quite work in magic as I'm not quite sure what Territories actually "are" (energy is a counter, dungeons are actual cards, and City's Blessing/Monarch is a state but I'm not sure what territories would be classified as). Is there any way to make this general concept work within the rules of MTG or is it a bit too nebulous to realistically function?
Honestly, limiting it to JUST the library instead of hand + library, while not following the normal templating for the card, would make it a bit trickier to use and would remove the problem of people randomly demanding to know what you have (as that information changes unknowably as soon as you draw your next card).
This card incentivizes talking forever to search your opponent's library, because if you do, every subsequent cast of this spell is a Cranial Extraction for half price. And since the library is revealed, it's a public zone, so they can't lie to you if you ask them how many of a given card are in it. This means you can quickly ask them "How many of Card A are in your deck? How many of card B?" and so on through every card in their deck. As long as you did that in a timely manner, it wouldn't be illegal.
That doesn’t quite seem to be true. If my opponent shuffles the library to change the order of cards and then draws a card, it is no longer known for certain how many copies of each card are in the library.
With that said, this card should DEFINITELY make opponents shuffle their deck so you don’t have perfect knowledge of what they will draw.
I have a feeling this isn't as skill testing as the text implies. Are there many cards you would want to extract that are run in variable amounts?
Ignoring cards typically splashed as a 1-of or 2-of in certain deck lists, I get the impression that the presence of this card within a format would make it skill-testing.
It might be dangerous to put four copies of a staple card into your deck if players are using this, for example, but if you put in three and someone guesses correctly or your opponent doesn’t use this card, you made your deck less consistent for what feels like no reason.
Not a huge thing but I can see what the card is trying to do.
Uhh... Declaration in stone does NOT exile from the library. It simply kills all creatures that they own with the same name. If reanimator decks and mystic reflection-esque combo decks that make oodles of identical tokens are prominent in the metagame, declaration in stone seems okay. Generally, though, instant speed and the ability to hit planeswalkers makes Fateful Absence a stronger overall choice while Declaration might serve as a sideboard piece in a very specific meta.
The stranger thigns cards have been confirmed not to use "Friends forever" on their Magicized cards. So, they can't be functionally the same cards either.
Which raises some questions about playing both in the same deck.
As far as I can tell, the new stranger things cards not using "Friends Forever" is no different from a new Michonne card referring to Zombie tokens rather than walkers. The ability will be given a new coat of paint in the exact same way but it will be identical and you will end up being allowed to play Will with Not-mike even though will has Friends Forever and Not-mike will have "alliance" or some-such. Oracle will say that Friends forever = "Alliance" in the same way that it will say that Walker = zombie token or Mike = Not-mike.
Is it messy? Hell yes.
Is it also going to happen? Most likely.
The issue is, if the ST and MtG versions are going to be functionally identical, friends forever will either be partner, which changes the cards to be able to paly together with all partner cards OR friends forever will be its own keyword thats otherwise identical to partner, but not interact with it, which is just confusing to be honest. Neither option strikes me as particularly desirable.
From rules people on twitter they won't have partner, they want this group of cards to be useable together but don't wanna add into the normal partner pools for a lot of reasons.
As stated, the magic-used term and “friends forever” are going to functionally be the same mechanic in oracle text. You can have 2 commanders with friends forever, 2 with the new mechanic, or one of each, but not one with either mechanic and a normal partner. The pool stays the same.
The stranger thigns cards have been confirmed not to use "Friends forever" on their Magicized cards. So, they can't be functionally the same cards either.
Which raises some questions about playing both in the same deck.
As far as I can tell, the new stranger things cards not using "Friends Forever" is no different from a new Michonne card referring to Zombie tokens rather than walkers. The ability will be given a new coat of paint in the exact same way but it will be identical and you will end up being allowed to play Will with Not-mike even though will has Friends Forever and Not-mike will have "alliance" or some-such. Oracle will say that Friends forever = "Alliance" in the same way that it will say that Walker = zombie token or Mike = Not-mike.
Is it messy? Hell yes.
Is it also going to happen? Most likely.
This is not an obstacle, exactly. The Magic-ized version of the stranger thing cards aren’t going to be like the Godzilla cards that list the name of the original.
Has that been confirmed?
The only thing that will stop a deck from including 4 copies of each is that the oracle entry for the card will dictate that they are the same card.
Having to look on gatherer to see if a card in your deck is the same as another might cause problems, the Godzilla style of cards would alleviate that without having to look up information on the internet.
TWD was the context in which they originally described how those reprints would work. I believe that the actual information was shared in a combination of Blogatog responses, Tweets, and a Weekly MTG stream from around the time (there were REALLY bad at disseminating information).
They have staunchly refused to commit to making TWD cards to my knowledge and they have specifically stated that the guarantee to reprint all new cards through the list does NOT apply to TWD, though they have maintained that it is possible for them to do so in the future.
Likely the reason for it being licensing issues cause even MTG variants of TWD cards would require using TWD character names on them and they likely didn't renew the license or whatever goes with that process.
This is not an obstacle, exactly. The Magic-ized version of the stranger thing cards aren’t going to be like the Godzilla cards that list the name of the original. The new card for Will or Mike would not need to list the name “Will” or “Mike” anywhere on the card. The only thing that will stop a deck from including 4 copies of each is that the oracle entry for the card will dictate that they are the same card. The magic-ized Michone will have a different name and will use zombie tokens, I can almost guarantee you.
With that said, licensing problems may be at play for The Walking Dead cards and just those cards for other reasons. Because TWD was the first UB type deal made with an outside company and the full roadmap for UB wasn’t worked out (and because they had yet to deal with the fallout around TWD), it is possible that wizards implied or promised that these cards would be more exclusive when making that offer than they did when making sales pitches to other properties afterwards. While their hands may not be tied in the same sense as the reserved list, they may still be made to look untrustworthy as a business partner if they reprint the cards too soon, depending on what was promised.
Again, though, I don’t see that problem repeating itself in the future.
Reprinting them through The List is only going to make these cards much harder to obtain with whales hoarding so much sealed product containing them not to mention how bad the pull rates are.
Okay, let's say it again.
Every Set Booster Box for New Capenna is expected to have 3-4 "magic-ized" Stranger Things Cards (one per 8 set boosters). That is about the rarity of a normal mythic card. For every 3 copies of *Insert 3-color demon mob boss mythic* New Capenna puts in circulation, I would expect between 1 and 2 copies of a magic-ized Will or Mindflayer to be circulating.
While most mythics will technically be more common (as you won't be able to crack this from a Collector/Draft booster), these cards should be more common than something like Lynde in Midnight hunt due to the GREATLY increased pull rate. These will not be rare in the sense that box toppers or expeditions are.
Are we gonna get the walking dead cards also as regular mtg cards? Does anyone know?
They have staunchly refused to commit to making TWD cards to my knowledge and they have specifically stated that the guarantee to reprint all new cards through the list does NOT apply to TWD, though they have maintained that it is possible for them to do so in the future.
**** partner. If you want to print this cash grab ***** at least don't pollute commander with that
Unfortunately WOTC is very butt hurt over the fact that they do not have final say over format. Hence they keep making cards specifically to mess with it's rules.
And honestly these new cards really are just a middle finger to the player base. They say these will have normal printed versions, but here's the thing. Those prints will be on the list which is about 300 cards that you might get one of for every 4 packs and of those 300 cards there is a heavy amount of cheap chaff cards. They are just making a new kinda mythic that is even harder to get.
As someone else pointed out, every 8 set boosters for New Capenna will have one of these cards. Not 1 in 8 packs with cards from the list, 1 in 8 set boosters period (AKA an average set booster box will have 3-4 cards from this selection). All of them will have equal rarity for pulls as well.
If anything, we will be swimming in the mtg versions of these cards. It’s one of the few things that wizards has done right with this whole situation (while it effectively doubles the rarity of everything else on the list, cards from the list have never been a reliable source of reprint equity and this measure makes it much more likely to get an extra rare in your booster on the whole).
Regarding what this is, I suppose that counters work best for what Territory is supposed to be. With that, this is supposed to be a resource that you can steal from others and the language for doing so with counters doesn’t really exist under someone’s control to steal.
I guess that the proper language (or something closer to it) would be.
Territory
Whenever a creature deals combat damage to you, you lose one territory counter. If you do, that creature’s controller gains a territory counter.
Is that a clear way to put things in rules terms. Does this cause any rules headaches in settings like 2HG where creatures controlled by two players may hit you simultaneously or does the rules allow that to work out?
What I came up with was rough emulation of the Skirmish ability originally imagined for War of the Sparks, playing out as the lovechild of Monarch and Energy by way of Strixhaven Stadium.
Territory (Whenever a creature deals combat damage to you, its controller may claim one of your territories)
That's the mechanic. You can build up multiple territories and potentially expend them to create effects as with energy from Kaladesh but the fact that they can be stolen through combat damage means that almost any player has access to counterplay (rather than being uninteractive).
Example Cards:
Creature- Human Rogue (C)
committed Recruit has vigilance as long as you have one or more territories.
2/2
Protection Racket
Creature- Human Warrior (U)
2/3
From the Inside
Sorcery (R)
From the Inside costs
Destroy all creatures. You lose all territories.
Daring Saboteur
Creature- Vedalken Rogue (C)
Daring Saboteur cannot be blocked while attacking a player with two or more territories.
1/1
Backalley Dealings
Sorcery (U)
Scry 2, then draw two cards.
You gain two Territories.
Secret Dealer
Creature- Human Rogue (R)
When enters the battlefield, you gain a Territory.
Whenever you take a territory from an opponent, you may pay
2/3
Rat Out
Sorcery (C)
You lose two Territories. For each territory lost in this way, each opponent discards a card.
Create two 1/1 Black Rat creature tokens.
Brutal Retaliation
Enchantment (U)
Whenever you lose one or more territories, create a 1/1 black orc rogue creature token.
Backalley Lieutenant
Creature- Orc Rogue (R)
When Backalley Lieutenant enters the battlefield, you gain a Territory.
Whenever you take a territory from an opponent, put a +1/+1 counter on target rogue you control.
1/1
Fervent Enforcer
Creature- Goblin Warrior (C)
When Fervent Enforcer enters the battlefield, you gain one Territory.
As long as you have three or more territories, Fervent Enforcer gets +1/+0 and has haste.
2/2
Staged Accident
Sorcery (U)
Destroy target land. Staged Accident deals 1 damage to its controller for each Territory you possess.
You gain one Territory.
Cash Out
Sorcery (R)
You lose all Territories. For each territory lost in this way, create a treasure token.
Audacious Pet
Creature- Beast (C)
Defender
Audacious Pet can attack as though it didn’t have defender if you have four or more Territories.
6/6
Case the Joint
Sorcery (U)
Look at the top four cards of your library. You may reveal a colorless card from among them and put it into your hand. Put the rest on the bottom of your library in a random order.
You gain one Territory.
Felltimber’s Favored
Creature- Elf Warrior (R)
When Felltimber’s Favored enters the battlefield, you gain one Territory.
Felltimber’s Favored gets +1/+1 for each Territory you possess.
1/1
I think that the general idea of the Territories is fairly straightforward but I feel that it doesn't quite work in magic as I'm not quite sure what Territories actually "are" (energy is a counter, dungeons are actual cards, and City's Blessing/Monarch is a state but I'm not sure what territories would be classified as). Is there any way to make this general concept work within the rules of MTG or is it a bit too nebulous to realistically function?
That doesn’t quite seem to be true. If my opponent shuffles the library to change the order of cards and then draws a card, it is no longer known for certain how many copies of each card are in the library.
With that said, this card should DEFINITELY make opponents shuffle their deck so you don’t have perfect knowledge of what they will draw.
Ignoring cards typically splashed as a 1-of or 2-of in certain deck lists, I get the impression that the presence of this card within a format would make it skill-testing.
It might be dangerous to put four copies of a staple card into your deck if players are using this, for example, but if you put in three and someone guesses correctly or your opponent doesn’t use this card, you made your deck less consistent for what feels like no reason.
Not a huge thing but I can see what the card is trying to do.
You do realize that this is a commercial with what seems to be zero cannonical value, right?
I don’t think any of these actors advertising Arena/MTG could be considered villains of MTG.
Nice commercial, though. Big 90s energy.
As stated, the magic-used term and “friends forever” are going to functionally be the same mechanic in oracle text. You can have 2 commanders with friends forever, 2 with the new mechanic, or one of each, but not one with either mechanic and a normal partner. The pool stays the same.
As far as I can tell, the new stranger things cards not using "Friends Forever" is no different from a new Michonne card referring to Zombie tokens rather than walkers. The ability will be given a new coat of paint in the exact same way but it will be identical and you will end up being allowed to play Will with Not-mike even though will has Friends Forever and Not-mike will have "alliance" or some-such. Oracle will say that Friends forever = "Alliance" in the same way that it will say that Walker = zombie token or Mike = Not-mike.
Is it messy? Hell yes.
Is it also going to happen? Most likely.
TWD was the context in which they originally described how those reprints would work. I believe that the actual information was shared in a combination of Blogatog responses, Tweets, and a Weekly MTG stream from around the time (there were REALLY bad at disseminating information).
This is not an obstacle, exactly. The Magic-ized version of the stranger thing cards aren’t going to be like the Godzilla cards that list the name of the original. The new card for Will or Mike would not need to list the name “Will” or “Mike” anywhere on the card. The only thing that will stop a deck from including 4 copies of each is that the oracle entry for the card will dictate that they are the same card. The magic-ized Michone will have a different name and will use zombie tokens, I can almost guarantee you.
With that said, licensing problems may be at play for The Walking Dead cards and just those cards for other reasons. Because TWD was the first UB type deal made with an outside company and the full roadmap for UB wasn’t worked out (and because they had yet to deal with the fallout around TWD), it is possible that wizards implied or promised that these cards would be more exclusive when making that offer than they did when making sales pitches to other properties afterwards. While their hands may not be tied in the same sense as the reserved list, they may still be made to look untrustworthy as a business partner if they reprint the cards too soon, depending on what was promised.
Again, though, I don’t see that problem repeating itself in the future.
Okay, let's say it again.
Every Set Booster Box for New Capenna is expected to have 3-4 "magic-ized" Stranger Things Cards (one per 8 set boosters). That is about the rarity of a normal mythic card. For every 3 copies of *Insert 3-color demon mob boss mythic* New Capenna puts in circulation, I would expect between 1 and 2 copies of a magic-ized Will or Mindflayer to be circulating.
While most mythics will technically be more common (as you won't be able to crack this from a Collector/Draft booster), these cards should be more common than something like Lynde in Midnight hunt due to the GREATLY increased pull rate. These will not be rare in the sense that box toppers or expeditions are.
They have staunchly refused to commit to making TWD cards to my knowledge and they have specifically stated that the guarantee to reprint all new cards through the list does NOT apply to TWD, though they have maintained that it is possible for them to do so in the future.
As someone else pointed out, every 8 set boosters for New Capenna will have one of these cards. Not 1 in 8 packs with cards from the list, 1 in 8 set boosters period (AKA an average set booster box will have 3-4 cards from this selection). All of them will have equal rarity for pulls as well.
If anything, we will be swimming in the mtg versions of these cards. It’s one of the few things that wizards has done right with this whole situation (while it effectively doubles the rarity of everything else on the list, cards from the list have never been a reliable source of reprint equity and this measure makes it much more likely to get an extra rare in your booster on the whole).
I picked up craterhoofs back with jumpstart and that will probably be most of the value, right there.